Operator: DISCUSS

I. Method

1. Write down the central thesis

2. Outline your arguments

- List at least three pro and three contra; less and you WILL lose points (1 really good pro, 1 really
good contra = 05 Notenpunkte)

- Now choose which side you are on. Discard (throw out) any doubled or weak arguments
(especially those supporting your case).

- Put your arguments into order of importance (1 = most important): 1-2-3-4 (pro) and 1-2-3-4
(contra).

3. Structure in a nutshell

1. Introduction = contextualisation + central thesis + statement of intent

2. Arguments (min. 3) contra central thesis
3. Transitory passage
4. Arguments (min. 3) pro central thesis
5. Conclusion = restate one good argument against your case and two for your case + clear,
balanced personal opinion + appellation to the reader

*Each argument needs to be structured like this:

Point (the argument) + Evidence (give an example) and/or Explanation

II. Example

Discuss: Animal testing is necessary

Central thesis: Animal testing is not necessary.

Outline:

Arguments contra central thesis:

• Animal testing has contributed to many life-saving cures and treatments.
• Animals do not have rights, therefore it is acceptable to experiment on them.
• Animals themselves benefit from the results of animal testing.
• There is no adequate alternative to testing on a living, whole-body system.

Arguments pro central thesis:

• Drugs that pass animal tests are not necessarily safe.
• Animals can suffer like humans do.
• Animal testing is cruel and inhumane.
• Animals' rights are not protected.

Order of importance:

Contra central thesis:

Second argument is discarded as it is ‘däääämlich’.

1. Animal testing has contributed to many life-saving cures and treatments.

2. There is no adequate alternative to testing on a living, whole-body system.
3. Animals themselves benefit from the results of animal testing.

Pro central thesis:

Third argument is discarded as it is too similar to argument two.

1. Animals can suffer like humans do.

2. Animals' rights are not protected.
3. Drugs that pass animal tests are not necessarily safe.
Model text (with some nice Av+)

Introduction

Having been involved with the subject of animal testing during summer school, I asked myself if the
use of animals is at all justified. After extensive deliberation I have come to the conclusion that:
Animal testing although helpful in certain extreme cases is never justified. In the following essay I
will take into consideration, firstly, the main lines of argumentation for animal testing and then
refute them by contemplating the arguments against.

Main body (simply done)

Contra central thesis

The quintessential argument for testing is derived from the aspect that [argumentation 1].
Furthermore, this is supported by the fact there is [argumentation 2]. Additively, it must be
elucidated that [argumentation 3].

Transitory passage

Bearing this in mind, now is the time, however, to take into the account why animal testing cannot
be considered as an alternative.

Pro central thesis

Firstly, and of significance importance is [argumentation 3]. On top of that, it needs to be realised
that [argumentation 2]. Finally, of paramount and intrinsic magnitude is the matter that
[argumentation 1].

Conclusion

Ultimately, it needs to be seen that although animal testing has indeed saved numerous human
lives that this has also resulted in incorrect treatment of ailments and in extreme cases human
death. It simply cannot be that we promote our own well-being through the suffering of innocent
animals. Therefore, I believe it is time to accept that our problems are our own problems and to
stop trying to solve them by using healthy animals who have nothing to do with them. Can you
stand by and do nothing? Is it time for you to say stop? Then get active, be creative and join me in
my campaign to change this state of affairs and subscribe to “Enough is enough – End Animal
Testing” at www.enoughisenough.org.